OMG, NAKED PEOPLE

I was clicking around on deviantART and ended up on a photo of a woman's butt. After favoriting it, I noticed two similar comments. First being "I don't see how butts count as art..." and the second one being "This website is for art only, NOT RAUNCHY SEXUAL CRAP!!" I replied to both comments saying that Robert Mapplethorpe is known for photographing nude men, Larry Sultan had a series of photographs taken on porn sets, and Helmut Newton currently has an exhibition at the Annenberg Space For Photography featuring photographs from his book Big Nudes.

But these type of comments got me thinking:
Why is it more socially accepted that the nude figure is only art if it is done by hand?

There are many famous paintings and sculptors of the nude figure and (most) people consider those art, yet if someone took a picture of someone in the same pose, (some of) those same people will view it as porn and smut. This is bullshit. It still takes a lot of work to take a good photo, regardless of what it's of. There's lighting to consider and perfect, composition, developing whether it's film or via photoshop, and so much more.


So remember: photography IS art

photo credit: Helmut Newton